iScott Posted March 29, 2008 Share Posted March 29, 2008 So say that I buy 5000 dvd's of different movies and then upload all the content to a sever and give access to anyone who wants to watch them at any time for free, is that against the law? (in America) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacUser2525 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 So say that I buy 5000 dvd's of different movies and then upload all the content to a sever and give access to anyone who wants to watch them at any time for free, is that against the law? (in America) Oh yeah besides the DMCA violations by cracking the CSS protection you would be open to massive criminal copyright violation all by itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danerd100 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 That is against the law, however, DCMA or ICL (not sure which) allows you to make two (2) backups of every disk you have for your own use, and no one else can use them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iScott Posted March 30, 2008 Author Share Posted March 30, 2008 How is that against the law? I am not charging people to watch them, and I am allowed to make a backup of every movie I buy, it just so happens that I back it up to a server. What is the difference between that and letting a friend borrow a movie and he returns it after he watches it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danerd100 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 The industry isn't getting any of the money they deserve. It is the same as bit torrents and the OSx86 project, it is COPYING COPYright data. Also, you must have the right to broadcast a movie publicly Example: I am a top selling music artist. I have my songs on ITunes, and I get $.10 for every song. 100,000 people download my song legally, I then get $10,000 for those songs. If 100,000 more people download them through your site, I am losing $10,000 that I deserve What is the difference between that and letting a friend borrow a movie and he returns it after he watches it. I am not sure if this is legal or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacUser2525 Posted March 30, 2008 Share Posted March 30, 2008 How is that against the law? I am not charging people to watch them, and I am allowed to make a backup of every movie I buy, it just so happens that I back it up to a server. What is the difference between that and letting a friend borrow a movie and he returns it after he watches it. If you were in Canada like I am then that is not illegal or what you originally proposed is not but your not here, in the US it is against the the law to lend the movie no one has the rights to that movie but you. You can take that movie to your friends house then watch it with him but not leave it there for him to watch... Also by putting them movies on a server that anyone can access then according to the content mafia you have made it available for distribution which they claim is illegal (quite sucessfully so far I might add) and they will sue your ass into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonTheSavage Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 The DMCA is an American Empire law. If he isn't from the American Empire, then he has nothing to worry about. {censored} THE DMCA. And {censored} Digital Restriction Management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark4181 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Then, technically speaking, all the places in the USA that sell used CDs and DVDs are in violation of the law too The system is just plain screwed up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killbot1000 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Example:I am a top selling music artist. I have my songs on ITunes, and I get $.10 for every song. 100,000 people download my song legally, I then get $10,000 for those songs. If 100,000 more people download them through your site, I am losing $10,000 that I deserve This is where you're logic leads you astray. 100,000 people downloading something for free does not translate to 100,000 people buying a song legally, many of these 100,000 people wouldn't have paid for the song anyway. Record companies will do exactly what you have done here in calculating their "loss" of sales due to piracy, they will simply take every pirated copy, and muliply it by the retail price that THEY charge for songs, and then calculate the total "Loss". This is not an accurate way to calculate the total loss in sales. My personal guess is that it does have an effect, but a much smaller one than many people might think. When it comes to the artist deserving 10% of the money from their own work, I feel that they deserve much much more than this. The artist who actually makes these record companies rich gets to keep 10% of their money from their own work? In what universe does this make any sense? Personally, I am ecstatic to see the record companies slowly fall into a downward spiral. Because there's not massive amounts of money to be made in music anymore, its about the music again and not the money! Artists are selling their own material in their own way on their own website, music is becoming free, open, and more of a festival style again, it is amazing! Only in the last year or two have I actually been able to find GOOD MUSIC. I feel that music is artistic expression, I could care less about some big ass record company going under because they couldn't make enough cash. Art is art, money only seeks to ruin it...REALLY... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacUser2525 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I feel that music is artistic expression, I could care less about some big ass record company going under because they couldn't make enough cash. Art is art, money only seeks to ruin it...REALLY... Not to mention their ongoing theft from the public domain with the ever expanding length of copyright they are lobbying for/have accomplished in some parts worldwide, basically nothing is ever going to enter the public domain in the US again and quite possibly everywhere else as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Example:I am a top selling music artist. I have my songs on ITunes, and I get $.10 for every song. 100,000 people download my song legally, I then get $10,000 for those songs. If 100,000 more people download them through your site, I am losing $10,000 that I deserve If I could buy open, DRM free, 320 kbps MP3's for 10 cents a song, and all of that 10 cents went to the artist, I would pay for my music. Until that happens, I always have what.cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark4181 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 If I could buy open, DRM free, 320 kbps MP3's for 10 cents a song, and all of that 10 cents went to the artist, I would pay for my music. Until that happens, I always have what.cd :censored2: +1 ...maybe even 20 cents if it all went to the artist or even 50 cents for full cd quality tracks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danerd100 Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I see where all of you are coming from, I was just explaining why it was illegal. That was the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djet Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I agree with what Killbot said. Why should recording studios get most of the money? They didn't do that much work. Not as much as the artist at least. I am against music pirates. If I hear a song on the radio or something and it sounds good I will buy it. I'm not saying that to prove how righteous I am, just saying that they did the work and I should pay them. At least that's how I feel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killbot1000 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I agree with what Killbot said. Why should recording studios get most of the money? They didn't do that much work. Not as much as the artist at least. I am against music pirates. If I hear a song on the radio or something and it sounds good I will buy it. I'm not saying that to prove how righteous I am, just saying that they did the work and I should pay them. At least that's how I feel I'm waiting for the record companies to cave before I do this. I have already bought from artists who have broken free from this business model. Nine Inch Nails, and Radiohead are good examples of this, as well as many local DJ's and artists, awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonTheSavage Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Not to mention their ongoing theft from the public domain with the ever expanding length of copyright they are lobbying for/have accomplished in some parts worldwide, basically nothing is ever going to enter the public domain in the US again and quite possibly everywhere else as well. Complete restriction of information is what they want, and what the people that back them want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djet Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Yes the record companies are for world domination..... can you stop thinking that everytime someone does somethign wrong in your opinion they are trying to end the world and only have YOUR utmost destruction in mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I am against music pirates. If I hear a song on the radio or something and it sounds good I will buy it. I'm not saying that to prove how righteous I am, just saying that they did the work and I should pay them. At least that's how I feel Don't be a singles whore! It doesn't take much skill or work to make a good song (look at all the one-hit-wonders!), a good album, however, is the result of great talent. $9.99 on iTunes for a {censored} 128kbps, DRM riddled albums? No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djet Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Yeah songs aren't super hard to write, but neither is pressing the record button on a computer. (Yes there is more to the record companies to that.... I know) Just saying, what about you wrote a fantastic program that amazingly allowed you to run .exe on Mac. You wouldn't want yourself to get 10% of it then a company that is making the CD's for it to get the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killbot1000 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Yeah songs aren't super hard to write, but neither is pressing the record button on a computer. (Yes there is more to the record companies to that.... I know) Just saying, what about you wrote a fantastic program that amazingly allowed you to run .exe on Mac. You wouldn't want yourself to get 10% of it then a company that is making the CD's for it to get the rest. Seriously! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts